As I read the responses I ran across a post I have copied below - it should now be clear to those following the thread that the objection is not to the dance - it is to the very idea of dance, of music, of art, of joy - and that is rejection is tied to a particular kind of religiosity, one which seeks to contract, not expand the the experience of BEing Muslim, one which seeks solace in "the good old days", when there was certainty, when one could be sure of things and did not need to think, to reflect on the meaning of the experience - there is a mould and all you do is fit in to it and all will be OK in the end, your reward is not "being in love with God" but rather in avoiding his wrath, it's a particular kind of view of God, where as Quran repeated says, Merciful and Compassionate", this religiosity needs neither Mercy nor Compassion for it is all about dos and don'ts -- Read the post below and judge for your self, I have presented in bold the ideas that I suggest are designed to create contraction, not expansion of the experience of being Muslim, Ideas that seek to deny Individuality and diversity of experience and to straight jacket the experience of being Muslim:
Originally Posted by muse
Further, Shahrukh Khan and "bollywood Khans" are real Muslims
because that they respect the confessions of others, in particular their wives -- What next, children with "non-Muslim" names? Horror of horrors
.
I know above mentioned paragraph was written for me so let me clear my point. I thought you are a sensible man and well aware of the facts but let me add something for you knowledge.
Who is a Muslim?
Do you know why Surah Al-Kafiron was revealed?
Let me tell you something about Shahrukh Khan, Islamically you cannot marry a Hindu wife do you agree that? period
He said he go to the mosques, go to the temples and pray both at the same time. If i can remember he said, he has established the small mandir (temple) in part of his house as well but can't remember exactly.
Furthermore, His son name is Rahul and in videos i realised he was more like a Hindu than a Muslim.
Do you know few non-believers came to Prophet Muhammad S.A.W and said we can make an agreement with you that for one year, we will pray your LORD and for second year you worship the Idols and Prophet Muhammad S.A.W said i will reply you tomorrow and in that while, Surah Kafiron was revealed and read the translation if you are not aware of it (109th chapter of the Holy Qur'an i think not sure)
In Islam, we could be either Muslim or a Non Muslim their are only two words. Believers or non-believers, Supporters of the God or the Shaitaan nothing else..... so it is not possible for a Muslim to worship anything besides Allah Subhanwata'Allah itself. Allah is One and only ONE, nobody is worthy to be worship besides him and if anybody does, he is not a Muslim.
Despite these facts i haven't declared him a Kafir or anything like that because i am not a Qualified scholar and it is possible whatever they show on the TV could be wrong and he may be intentionaly wanting to show something else. It is only ALLAH who can decide who is a better Muslim but apparently Shahrukh and other Bollywood actors seriously need to think about the hereafter.
Regards
Peace
And this absolute gem, it will give us further insight into the mental frame work of this religiosity, for which Islam is a IDEOLOGY, notice nowhere will you read them to be occupied with the idea of FAITH (Emaan), which if it is not being in love with God, is without meaning:
Who should interpret the religion if not a religious scholar whom you are calling 'Moulana'? Do you have credentials to interpret religion? Do you know Arabic let alone the Arabic of fourteen hundred years ago? Do you have any formal education of religion? How many Hadith and Fiqh book have you read? And if answers to my questions are in 'no', which indeed are in 'no', than how on earth will you interpret Islam correctly?
Who other than the communist ideologue will understand and create policy? I would request readers focus on the following:
answers to my questions are in 'no', which indeed are in 'no', than how on earth will you interpret Islam correctly?
On the one hand while acknowledging that it is merely an "interpretation", a person who is a "scientist", in other words a person who by training understands that knowledge is evolving, that knowledge grows and can contract, still seeks certitude, an impossibility given the nature of knowledge, that is to say, it's evolutionary nature.
These attempts at fixing a square peg in a round cavity, are the result of a serious misunderstanding of religion, it's deliberate distortion into a ideology.
